12 ms·

I ride extensively around the Providence, RI area. Cars are simply a scourge to biking here, at a time when we need less global and local pollution and we need

I ride extensively around the Providence, RI area. Cars are simply a scourge to biking here, at a time when we need less global and local pollution and we need to improve health via air quality and exercise. We have VERY few protected lanes, mostly there are "sharrows" aka faded pictures of bikes on the road that do absolutely zilch. I am routinely honked at and ignorant/rude people yell things out of their car windows at me, usually because I'm going too slow/am in their way on the very narrow (designed before cars) streets. Cars simply dominate due to the wealth and political power of all the car owners (many of whom have Florida plates to avoid local taxes). Do any of the politicians even ride bikes to their legislature or have any understanding of cyclists' issues? An illustrative example of our inadequacy is going in between two fantastic/picturesque protected paths: the East Bay Path along Narragansett Bay to the Blackstone River Path. You have to pass through 5+ miles of the urban and narrow streets of Providence, Pawtucket, and Central Falls. It's honestly a nightmare, I'd rather bring my car to transport my bike from one path to the other than ride in between myself, breathing in exhaust from old clunkers and trucks, experiencing road rage and petty rudeness, and of course nearly getting hit on multiple occasions. Let's get our act together and make a network of protected lanes across the North East corridor. With electric bikes coming to the fore, I'm hoping more and more cyclists will be able to cover longer and longer ranges, thus facilitating low-emissions, healthy inter-city transport.

fhbdukfrh 7y ago
I agree with your general sentiment, but don't think people on electric bikes are going to improve the situation, rather make it much, much worse based on the electric bike share pilot in my city. Someone who owns their ebike might be better, but those on shared bikes are a danger to everyone and never wear a helmet.
- gpm 7y ago
  Wearing a helmet increases your chance of death on a bike according to the statistics. I personally don't, I feel less safe wearing one. I can't locate cars as accurately with audio with one on my head, the extra weight makesy head turn slower, and I think subconsciously left often. Drivers pass more aggressively and illegally (most drivers passing break the law here that requires a meter seperation when passing a cyclist, but they break it 'more' by coming closer when I wear a helmet).
  - driverdan 7y ago
    > Wearing a helmet increases your chance of death on a bike according to the statistics. Completely untrue. Bike helmets do increase the risk of concussion but decrease the risk of other serious injuries or death.
  - sjclemmy 7y ago
    Care to substantiate that?
    - gpm 7y ago
      I'll find a source tonight and link it here.
  - foota 7y ago
    Fairly certain that's bullshit. https://www.iihs.org/topics/pedestrians-and-bicyclists https://www.iihs.org/topics/pedestrians-and-bicyclists
    - gpm 7y ago
      Helmets protect you somewhat if you crash but are correlated with a significance increase in number of crashes. That page only addresses the first number.
    - anyanswers 7y ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/24/bike-helmet-appetite-danger https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/24/bike-helmet-...
  - maaaats 7y ago
    > Wearing a helmet increases your chance of death on a bike according to the statistics I've heard that too. If it's true, could the causality be the other way? As in, people wear a helmet when the chance of accidents is bigger. When I road bike on open roads it's both fast and higher chance of accidents, so I wear a helmet. Same with downhill cycling. But when using a city bike, I bike slow in the inner city, and don't have a helmet.
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  Having lived in China, I can tell you it doesn’t get better when they own their own e-bikes. Also, bike helmets are mostly an American/ Anglo sphere thing, there are whole countries with mass bike cultures that don’t bother with helmets and are still much safer than the USA.
  - dheera 7y ago
    I live in the US and consider helmets an absolute necessity here as I'm riding alongside cars, trucks, and various other things that could kill me instantly, and riding in streets that don't have bike lanes to begin with. The reason most other countries are safer is because of awareness of bikes and proper design of bike lanes. Google image search "bike lane china" or "bike lane netherlands" to see how safe bike lanes should be designed. In these places it's just much less common to be knocked off your bike in a dangerous manner. I've biked all over China and feel a lot safer there than in e.g. Palo Alto or San Francisco. However, personally, I'd still wear a helmet regardless. I like my brain.
    - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
      Yes, I agree with that. But it is a problem we created ourselves because of our love for car culture, not that helmets should be mandatory in other more sane countries. There aren't a lot of brain injuries in the Netherlands from bike accidents, so there is no demand for them. China really isn't on the list of sane places, but traffic is slow enough that helmets might not matter much anyways. My point about china was more about dangerous electric bicyclists zooming on the sidewalk and almost hitting you.
      - stevesimmons 7y ago
        I nearly got a brain injury in the Netherlands! I was riding too fast, carrying a TV, in heavy rain (all perfect normal for Amsterdam!). For some reason, I took my other hand off the handlebars, the front wheel spun round and I landed face-first on the road. :( 100% my fault; no other vehicles involved. (btw, I wear a helmet 100% of the time in the UK, and in NL when on my road bike with clipless pedals)
- hannasanarion 7y ago
  Electric bikes enable more people to participate in biking when they would have driven otherwise. It takes time to build up the leg strength it takes to bike well enough for commuting, most people don't have the time to train for weeks so that they can comfortably conquer the hill on the way to work or whatever. More bikes on the road means more pressure on drivers to keep an eye out, and more pressure on politicians to make infrastructure safe for cyclists.
- cbm-vic-20 7y ago
  Providence is one such city with an electric bikeshare fleet. The people who ride them appear to be in much more danger, as they rarely wear helmets and seem to be even less aware of traffic regulations than traditional cyclists.
- himeexcelanta 7y ago
  I’m curious which city you’re in. Not that it’s this simple, but it seems to me that any one of those electric bike-share users would otherwise be contributing to localized and global pollution and congestion through the use of a car. Additionally, the lack of infrastructure (i.e. protected/expanded bike lanes) would might explain why it seems like those cyclists “a danger to everyone”.
  - borkt 7y ago
    No, I saw a an ebike blow out of golden gate park against a red and cause a 3 car accident in SF a few weeks back, despite only spending a few days in SF each year. At least one or more of the cars were likely totalled and would contribute much more significantly to waste/emissions. I also saw a lot of people on bikes/scooters using sidewalks and crosswalks like their personal fast lines and ignoring signs and signals repeatedly as well.
    - himeexcelanta 7y ago
      I live in SF. Agree that there are many reckless scooter and e-bike users. To offer another anecdote, everyday I see Uber/Lyft drivers stopped in the middle of traffic, parked in red zones, and driving 10-15 mph under the speed limit. Either way, San Francisco has a big problem of actually enforcing the rule of law for traffic violations.
- WhompingWindows 7y ago
  In the city itself, I don't think ebike vs regular bike is the lynch-pin issue. But if we want to set up intra-city transport networks, if I want to go from Providence to Boston for instance, that's 50 miles which is way too much of a workout. If I have an e-bike, however, that extends my "comfortable" riding range from around 15-20 now to 50+ easily. For intra-city transport on protected paths, I think e-bikes will be a great revolution. Within cities themselves, we simply need to get smaller cars, autonomous probably would help, less car-trips overall, less parked cars, and with raised/separated bike lanes like Holland. Eventually, with more and more riders and good education, we could have regions of the USA with strong bike transport. Imagine, for instance, if we established certain roads/streets for non-car travel only. I'd expect a massive flourishing of businesses, increased walkability, better air quality, more room for greenery/outdoor tables and events, all due to taking one street here or there off the car-grid. Take Chicago or NYC for instance, they have numerous parallel streets, incredibly redundant network, cars could go around these non-car roads with ease. As of right now, cars dominate all of southern New England except for the Cambridge area.
gjs278 7y ago
biking is a scourge to cars. there are plenty of zero emission vehicles out there. I doubt anyone is yelling ignorant things at you. people who drive cars know you are annoying. you’re in the way and it’s impossible to pass you. we’re not going to expand every road because it would be impractical. if you get electric bikes you can just go 35mph and nobody will care. motorcycles do it fine.
my_username_is_ 7y ago
As a former Rhode Islander, I firmly believe that the East Bay Bike Path is the single greatest piece of infrastructure in the state.
linksnapzz 7y ago
Not from here, are you? :) Cars simply dominate due to the wealth and political power of all the car owners "Car owner" is not a really good metric for political power or wealth in RI. It's a sorta given, like in most of the US. If you are able to own/drive a car, but don't need to-I.E. you both live and work within walking, biking, or public transit distance of anywhere in the state you need to go, then you may be more likely to live in a wealthier neighborhood. Do any of the politicians even ride bikes to their legislature or have any understanding of cyclists' issues? Good heavens, you're not from around here, are you? If you were to list in order of significance "things that Rhode Island politicians have demonstrated a less-than-ideal grasp of", cyclist-related issues would come in pretty close to page 900, if one were to be depressed enough to compile such a list. As a rule, people who think it's OK to divert illegally-solicited campaign funds to pay for their mistress's breast enhancement surgery aren't big into cycling. They prefer Escalades. The legislators from Smith Hill/North Providence might be the only ones in the state who could plausibly ride a bike to work; Smith Street has a gentler slope in that direction. I'd be surprised if it's ever happened. Really, the only way to make bike transport work better in RI is if one were to somehow link payout of unionized public-sector employee pension benefits to person-miles traveled by bicycle. If you could pull that off, in no time the only way to get anywhere in the state would be by bike. You'd have to get to Block Island by cycling from Point Judith (there'd be a biiig ramp, see...)

fhbdukfrh 7y ago

I agree with your general sentiment, but don't think people on electric bikes are going to improve the situation, rather make it much, much worse based on the electric bike share pilot in my city. Someone who owns their ebike might be better, but those on shared bikes are a danger to everyone and never wear a helmet.

gpm 7y ago
Wearing a helmet increases your chance of death on a bike according to the statistics. I personally don't, I feel less safe wearing one. I can't locate cars as accurately with audio with one on my head, the extra weight makesy head turn slower, and I think subconsciously left often. Drivers pass more aggressively and illegally (most drivers passing break the law here that requires a meter seperation when passing a cyclist, but they break it 'more' by coming closer when I wear a helmet).
- driverdan 7y ago
  > Wearing a helmet increases your chance of death on a bike according to the statistics. Completely untrue. Bike helmets do increase the risk of concussion but decrease the risk of other serious injuries or death.
- sjclemmy 7y ago
  Care to substantiate that?
  - gpm 7y ago
    I'll find a source tonight and link it here.
- foota 7y ago
  Fairly certain that's bullshit. https://www.iihs.org/topics/pedestrians-and-bicyclists https://www.iihs.org/topics/pedestrians-and-bicyclists
  - gpm 7y ago
    Helmets protect you somewhat if you crash but are correlated with a significance increase in number of crashes. That page only addresses the first number.
  - anyanswers 7y ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/24/bike-helmet-appetite-danger https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/24/bike-helmet-...
- maaaats 7y ago
  > Wearing a helmet increases your chance of death on a bike according to the statistics I've heard that too. If it's true, could the causality be the other way? As in, people wear a helmet when the chance of accidents is bigger. When I road bike on open roads it's both fast and higher chance of accidents, so I wear a helmet. Same with downhill cycling. But when using a city bike, I bike slow in the inner city, and don't have a helmet.
seanmcdirmid 7y ago
Having lived in China, I can tell you it doesn’t get better when they own their own e-bikes. Also, bike helmets are mostly an American/ Anglo sphere thing, there are whole countries with mass bike cultures that don’t bother with helmets and are still much safer than the USA.
- dheera 7y ago
  I live in the US and consider helmets an absolute necessity here as I'm riding alongside cars, trucks, and various other things that could kill me instantly, and riding in streets that don't have bike lanes to begin with. The reason most other countries are safer is because of awareness of bikes and proper design of bike lanes. Google image search "bike lane china" or "bike lane netherlands" to see how safe bike lanes should be designed. In these places it's just much less common to be knocked off your bike in a dangerous manner. I've biked all over China and feel a lot safer there than in e.g. Palo Alto or San Francisco. However, personally, I'd still wear a helmet regardless. I like my brain.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    Yes, I agree with that. But it is a problem we created ourselves because of our love for car culture, not that helmets should be mandatory in other more sane countries. There aren't a lot of brain injuries in the Netherlands from bike accidents, so there is no demand for them. China really isn't on the list of sane places, but traffic is slow enough that helmets might not matter much anyways. My point about china was more about dangerous electric bicyclists zooming on the sidewalk and almost hitting you.
    - stevesimmons 7y ago
      I nearly got a brain injury in the Netherlands! I was riding too fast, carrying a TV, in heavy rain (all perfect normal for Amsterdam!). For some reason, I took my other hand off the handlebars, the front wheel spun round and I landed face-first on the road. :( 100% my fault; no other vehicles involved. (btw, I wear a helmet 100% of the time in the UK, and in NL when on my road bike with clipless pedals)
hannasanarion 7y ago
Electric bikes enable more people to participate in biking when they would have driven otherwise. It takes time to build up the leg strength it takes to bike well enough for commuting, most people don't have the time to train for weeks so that they can comfortably conquer the hill on the way to work or whatever. More bikes on the road means more pressure on drivers to keep an eye out, and more pressure on politicians to make infrastructure safe for cyclists.
cbm-vic-20 7y ago
Providence is one such city with an electric bikeshare fleet. The people who ride them appear to be in much more danger, as they rarely wear helmets and seem to be even less aware of traffic regulations than traditional cyclists.
himeexcelanta 7y ago
I’m curious which city you’re in. Not that it’s this simple, but it seems to me that any one of those electric bike-share users would otherwise be contributing to localized and global pollution and congestion through the use of a car. Additionally, the lack of infrastructure (i.e. protected/expanded bike lanes) would might explain why it seems like those cyclists “a danger to everyone”.
- borkt 7y ago
  No, I saw a an ebike blow out of golden gate park against a red and cause a 3 car accident in SF a few weeks back, despite only spending a few days in SF each year. At least one or more of the cars were likely totalled and would contribute much more significantly to waste/emissions. I also saw a lot of people on bikes/scooters using sidewalks and crosswalks like their personal fast lines and ignoring signs and signals repeatedly as well.
  - himeexcelanta 7y ago
    I live in SF. Agree that there are many reckless scooter and e-bike users. To offer another anecdote, everyday I see Uber/Lyft drivers stopped in the middle of traffic, parked in red zones, and driving 10-15 mph under the speed limit. Either way, San Francisco has a big problem of actually enforcing the rule of law for traffic violations.
WhompingWindows 7y ago
In the city itself, I don't think ebike vs regular bike is the lynch-pin issue. But if we want to set up intra-city transport networks, if I want to go from Providence to Boston for instance, that's 50 miles which is way too much of a workout. If I have an e-bike, however, that extends my "comfortable" riding range from around 15-20 now to 50+ easily. For intra-city transport on protected paths, I think e-bikes will be a great revolution. Within cities themselves, we simply need to get smaller cars, autonomous probably would help, less car-trips overall, less parked cars, and with raised/separated bike lanes like Holland. Eventually, with more and more riders and good education, we could have regions of the USA with strong bike transport. Imagine, for instance, if we established certain roads/streets for non-car travel only. I'd expect a massive flourishing of businesses, increased walkability, better air quality, more room for greenery/outdoor tables and events, all due to taking one street here or there off the car-grid. Take Chicago or NYC for instance, they have numerous parallel streets, incredibly redundant network, cars could go around these non-car roads with ease. As of right now, cars dominate all of southern New England except for the Cambridge area.

gjs278 7y ago

biking is a scourge to cars. there are plenty of zero emission vehicles out there. I doubt anyone is yelling ignorant things at you. people who drive cars know you are annoying. you’re in the way and it’s impossible to pass you. we’re not going to expand every road because it would be impractical. if you get electric bikes you can just go 35mph and nobody will care. motorcycles do it fine.

my_username_is_ 7y ago

As a former Rhode Islander, I firmly believe that the East Bay Bike Path is the single greatest piece of infrastructure in the state.

linksnapzz 7y ago

Not from here, are you? :) Cars simply dominate due to the wealth and political power of all the car owners "Car owner" is not a really good metric for political power or wealth in RI. It's a sorta given, like in most of the US. If you are able to own/drive a car, but don't need to-I.E. you both live and work within walking, biking, or public transit distance of anywhere in the state you need to go, then you may be more likely to live in a wealthier neighborhood. Do any of the politicians even ride bikes to their legislature or have any understanding of cyclists' issues? Good heavens, you're not from around here, are you? If you were to list in order of significance "things that Rhode Island politicians have demonstrated a less-than-ideal grasp of", cyclist-related issues would come in pretty close to page 900, if one were to be depressed enough to compile such a list. As a rule, people who think it's OK to divert illegally-solicited campaign funds to pay for their mistress's breast enhancement surgery aren't big into cycling. They prefer Escalades. The legislators from Smith Hill/North Providence might be the only ones in the state who could plausibly ride a bike to work; Smith Street has a gentler slope in that direction. I'd be surprised if it's ever happened. Really, the only way to make bike transport work better in RI is if one were to somehow link payout of unionized public-sector employee pension benefits to person-miles traveled by bicycle. If you could pull that off, in no time the only way to get anywhere in the state would be by bike. You'd have to get to Block Island by cycling from Point Judith (there'd be a biiig ramp, see...)